Connecticut Senate Bill SB00264

Connecticut 2017 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/18/17
• Refer: 1/18/17
• Refer: 3/16/17

Caption

An Act Requiring The Department Of Motor Vehicles To Enter Into Certain Service Agreements.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would revise existing statutes governing the DMV's operations, empowering it to authorize external contractors and municipalities in performing critical licensing functions. This shift is anticipated to improve accessibility and reduce wait times for residents needing license renewals or duplicates. Additionally, it outlines the prerequisites for such contractors or municipalities, including the establishment of performance standards, thus ensuring that service quality is maintained.

Summary

SB00264 is a legislative act aimed at enabling the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enter into service agreements with contractors, which includes motor vehicle dealerships and municipalities. The primary purpose of the bill is to facilitate the issuance of duplicate licenses and identity cards, renewals, and registration transactions at the offices of these contractors and municipalities. By doing this, the bill seeks to streamline and enhance the efficiency of services provided to residents pertaining to motor vehicle licensing and identification.

Sentiment

The reception of SB00264 has stirred varied sentiments among lawmakers and constituents. Proponents argue that extending the DMV's functionality to include third-party entities will decrease inefficiencies currently present in the system. They view this as a significant step forward for customer service. Conversely, some lawmakers express concerns over potential accountability issues and the implications of privatizing state services, fearing that this could lead to inconsistent service levels or increased fees for citizens.

Contention

A notable point of contention around SB00264 is the provision allowing contractors and municipalities to charge a 'convenience fee' of up to five dollars for processing license renewals and duplicate requests. Critics are apprehensive that while this fee might be nominal, it could disproportionately affect lower-income residents who may already face barriers in accessing essential services. Further debates center on protecting consumer rights while ensuring operational efficiencies via these service agreements.